The Gouverneur Morris Papers

A blog about the most eloquent Founding Father

We are delighted to announce that The Diaries of Gouverneur Morris: New York, 1799-1816, is now out in hard cover. (University of Virginia Press, 2018, ISBN 9780813939797; http://www.upress.virginia.edu/title/4689). The volume contains Morris's diaries from shortly after his return to New York from Europe until his death in 1816. In that time, Morris continued to be an active political figure, serving in the Senate, heading the commission that initiated the Erie Canal project, chairing the commission designing Manhattan's grid, establishing the northern New York towns of Gouverneur and Morristown, and opposing the War of 1812. He also delivered the official New York eulogy for George Washington and gave the funeral address for Alexander Hamilton.

The diaries are extensively annotated and provide meaningful new information about this last chapter of Morris's life, permitting a much deeper comprehension of his contributions, his experiences, and his trials. We believe they will provide a springboard for research in to such matters as the actual events leading to the origin of the Erie Canal; the nature of Morris's financial catastrophe and its cause; and his scathing condemnation of the diplomacy of Jefferson and Madison which led to the entirely avoidable (in Morris's view) War of 1812.

The new volume is also available in digital form on the University of Virginia Press ROTUNDA Founding Era website.

On Tuesday, September 17, 1811, Gouverneur Morris, at home in Morrisania, the Bronx, noted in his diary "An Eclipse of the Sun this Day." It was an annular eclipse, one that lasted nearly seven minutes, and occurred at 18:43 universal time, during the afternoon. An annular eclipse differs from the total eclipse we will experience next Monday, August 21, in that the moon is further from the earth when it blocks the sun, so that it does not entirely hide the sun, leaving a bright band of light around the dark circle of the moon. Morris did not state whether he looked directly at the eclipse or not, but we can only hope he did not, because it would have been as dangerous for him as today. It was undoubtedly a dramatic event for all who observed it.

In Tuesday's New York Times (6/29/2017), there was an article about the 200th anniversary of the ground-breaking for the Erie Canal. [here is the link: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/26/nyregion/history-of-the-erie-canal.html?_r=0] Once again, Morris's critical contributions to New York State were entirely ignored. Here is the letter we sent to the Times in response:

To the editor:

It was with pain that I read Mr.
Roberts’s article regarding the origins of the Erie Canal, because it repeats
misinformation that has been accepted since the late 1820s regarding Dewitt
Clinton’s importance in the project, and incredibly, omits mention of the man
who was truly the originator of the concept and at the forefront of the start
of its implementation, Gouverneur Morris.

As early as 1775, Morris had
articulated a vision of the future greatness of New York and the contribution
to be made by a canal from Lake Erie to the Hudson. He repeated this concept to
Simeon Dewitt, the New York surveyor general, in 1803 (after many years in
Europe, where Morris visited a number of canals); Dewitt, who gave Morris full
credit as the visionary of the Canal, wrote later that “I very naturally
opposed the intermediate hills and valleys, as insuperable obstacles. His
answer was, in substance, labor improbus
omnia vincit, and that the object would justify the labour and expense,
whatever that might be.”In 1808, a
canal commission was established, with Morris at its head –Simeon Dewitt and
Dewitt Clinton were also commissioners-- and Morris wrote all of its reports
until 1816, traveled with them to scout out routes, and proposed a feasible
means of financing it through loans from Europe after the federal government
refused to lend support (an effort he led in a trip to Congress).Morris also published anonymous essays in
support of the canal.When the War of
1812 came, however, the project was rejected by the legislature, probably to
some extent because of Morris’s known (and fierce) opposition to the War,
though Morris continued to publish pieces supporting the canal. When the war
ended, interest in it surged once more. By this time, Morris was frequently
ill, and though he drafted a last commission report, it was apparently modified
by fellow commissioners and his name omitted. In May 1816, six months before
his death, Morris wrote to a friend about the project that he had had “a
Presentiment that when it became popular I should no longer be trusted with the
Management.” He saw “with Concern that it is now, like every Thing else,
swallowed up in the Vortex of Party” but he had noted previously that he was
happy to have the credit given to “any person you please” as long as the canal
would come to pass.

The belief that Clinton was the
father of the canal seems to be due to a sycophantic 1829 pamphlet compiled by
a devoted friend of the governor, after Clinton’s death. The pamphlet quoted
Simeon Dewitt’s comments about Morris, but also cited other contrary sources,
who claimed, falsely, that Morris had been a hindrance to the project, that his
proposals regarding financing had been rejected with horror, and that he had
abandoned the project out of pique. It also included the highly suspect
assertions made many years after the canal’s construction began by a man named
Jesse Hawley, who claimed to have published early essays proposing the ultimate
route and that Clinton had been inspired to pursue the canal as a result of
those essays. We are still waiting to see evidence to support those claims:
Clinton said nothing of him in his daily journal concerning the 1810 canal route
trip, made with Morris, nor have we seen his name in any correspondence of
those years.Nonetheless, many
historians, including the author of the Wedding of the Waters,
apparently rely on this questionable pamphlet to dismiss Morris with scorn.

Whether Hawley wrote letters or not, the verifiable truth of Morris’s
work for the canal can be seen in Morris’s essays and in his diaries, both with
respect to his visits to canals in Europe and his tireless efforts on behalf of
the project during the 1800s. The diaries appear in a new transcription
published by the University of Virginia Press. Of course others made major
contributions as the engineering planning and construction began; but for the
editors of his papers, there is no question that Morris has been shamefully
ignored for his enlightened foresight and selfless dedication to what is one of
America’s most extraordinary achievements.

As the attendants of this seminar were interested in the historical, cultural and linguistic aspects of the Era of Enlightenment, they were eager to learn more about our Morris editing project. A golden opportunity to spread the latest news on that.... in France! And, at the same time lay some bricks on the road of future cooperation for research on Morris.

Professor Gerard Hugues and PhD-candidate Emilie Mitran are currently working on a French translation of Morris's Paris diaries. The availability of the diaries in French would obviously open up this magnificent historical source to many people beyond the anglophone world.

Morris's observations and his involvement with the major figures of the time have been of great interest for scholars of the period. In his Paris diaries of 1789-1793, Morris gave a lively (and sometimes intimate) report of his life during the French Revolution. A very accurate transcription of those diaries was published in 1939 by editor Beatrice C. Davenport, and recently we were able to make some additions in the revised online edition published by ROTUNDA of the University of Virginia Press.

Page in diary June 5, 1789 with many cross outs

Why the additions?
In the original diary there are illegible parts because of crossed out and blotted sentences, rendered in the text as three dots by Davenport. Usually these dots concern Morris's sexual escapades, but sometimes they are about medication and disease. Anything that was considered unsuited for the public eye.

The question is: who did it?
These cross-outs were perhaps partly done by Morris himself, obscuring some passionate moments with former lovers from his wife's eyes. But some other blot-outs could have been done by Morris's wife Ann Cary Randolph in the 1830s before handing the diary to Morris's first biographer Jared Sparks. Even his granddaughter Ann Cary Morris (another editor of his papers) in the 1880s is a possible "suspect."

During our work with the diaries, we discovered that some omissions were applied by Davenport herself in the 1930s. She used dots in place of a perfectly legible phrase; for example on 1 November 1789:"Madame is ill ..." whereas it says in the original: "Madame is ill she has the Infirmity of her Sex in a great Degree" Each editor was uneasy about something that was taboo in their own time. Of course, the modern scholar would like to know which parts were crossed out or left out.

Hyperspectral image of diary cross outs.

At the seminar we could discuss the results of hyperspectral images taken of some crossed-out sections. This state of the art technique was performed at the Library of Congress, but unfortunately those images did not reveal much. The goal was to show the difference between the original ink at the time of writing and the ink used later for blotting.

It turned out both inks were iron gall ink with the same spectral response and it was impossible to distinguish between them in order to date them. Thus, we still don't know when the cross-outs were done. We could however reconstruct a few phrases and fill in part of the "dots" in Davenport's online edition. See American Founding Era Collection, http://rotunda.upress.virginia.edu/founders/FGEA.html.

With words to that effect Gouverneur Morris ended his last letter to Mrs. Le Ray de Chaumont on February 27, 1807. Although the exact words Morris used were “some Years hence you will thank me” --more in the style of the early 19th century-- it suggests something unpleasant had been decided, and even though she could not see that yet, it would all be for the best.

Morris, this goes without saying, knew better. In fact, he was certain he knew best. He went on to inform her husband, James Le Ray de Chaumont (Morris’s business partner and friend, who was in Paris at that time) of the latest commotion involving his wife Grace (who resided in Philadelphia), telling him she would probably "call me a cross old Devil and feel much hurt.”

What was going on? Why would Morris reprimand his friend’s wife? It is time for some further investigation.

James Le Ray de Chaumont (1760-1840)

From Morris’s Letterbooks, that contain copies of the thousands of letters he sent out during his lifetime, we can tell that (business-) correspondence with Le Ray took place on a regular basis. About one letter every fortnight went back and forth during the times the men were not at the same location. From the period 1799-1816 (when GM lived at Morrisania near New York City), we have 136 letters to James Le Ray.

And, surprisingly, there are also eight letters to Grace Coxe Le Ray. These date from the period December 1805 to February 1807. This is in itself exceptional, because Morris would not have a reason to write to her personally, except in special cases.

However, by the end of 1805, a special case had arisen.

SOME BACKGROUND ON GRACE COXE.

The Coxes were one of the prominent families in Philadelphia. At the age of 27, in 1789, Grace married James Le Ray. The young Frenchman had come to America in 1785 to resolve some financial matters concerning his father, who had made large loans to the Continental Congress during the American War of Independence. The loans had been repaid in devalued paper money, causing an enormous loss for the family.

We learn a little more about their courtship (or rather, lack of courtship) from a letter Morris wrote to Le Ray in August 1807:

“... your conjugal Union arose from a Sense of Honor and Delicacy in you. That you accused yourself of having undesignedly, by Attentions which in your own Country pass for Nothing, and of Course make no Impression, interested her Feelings in such Way as (from her Account) to impair her Happiness thro Life. That you offered your Hand, provided your Parents would consent. That the same Sentiment of Honor had induced them to shut their Eyes also to Considerations of Fortune and splendid Connection.”

Apparently Morris seemed to think Le Ray had made a mistake in marrying her, but had done the honorable thing in doing so. Regardless, their wedding took place on July 14, 1789. Le Quartorze Juillet, but of course no one in Philadelphia had any idea yet of the important role this specific day was to play as the start of the French Revolution. News from overseas took several weeks to reach America.

Fall of the Bastille in 1789

Morris on the other hand, was in Paris at that time and witnessed how events spun out of control.By the time the young couple left for France in the spring of 1790, they would have known things were in turmoil overseas, but they went anyway and soon afterwards their oldest

son Vincent was born.

Gouverneur Morris’s diary first mentions meeting Grace in Paris at her sister-in-law’s house in January 1791. It sounds as if he met her then for the first time; he described her as “looking like a fool,” but what he meant with his remark remains unexplained. Was she not particularly bright, or perhaps not as fashionable or well-spoken as the other ladies in the elegant circles Morris was by then accustomed to?

By the way, two years before, in May 1789, Morris described a meeting in Paris with “Madame Chaumont,” who talked to him “very serious, considering that she is said to be crazy.” The editor of the Paris-part of the diary, the erudite and otherwise very accurate Beatrice C. Davenport, misidentified her as Grace instead of Le Ray de Chaumont’s mother, who was by then estranged from her husband. She lived off and on with her married daughters in Paris.Back to Grace’s story.

While Morris met Le Ray frequently during the next few years in Paris, he only mentions Grace four times, offering no additional information on her. When the situation in Paris became too dangerous after the fall of the Louis XVI, the Le Ray family took leave in September 1792, but Morris stayed behind (he was by now the American minister). After his successor had arrived by mid-1794, Morris left France to meet the Le Rays in Switzerland. It is evident that Grace was with her husband, for Morris stood as godfather to their newborn daughter Thérèse in a church in Lausanne in November.

No word on Grace for three and a half years, until 1798 when we learn that the family had traveled to Frankfurt, Germany, where Morris waited to meet them. Together they went north to Hamburg; from there they would take a boat back to the United States. Grace, James, toddler Thérèse and baby Alexander (born between 1795 and 1798), traveled together in their carriage(s), Morris in his own. There is no indication that 8-year old Vincent accompanied them; it could well have been that he was already enrolled in a school in Lausanne or Paris.

A three-masted schooner.

In the meantime it had become possible for James to return to France and he decided he would go to Paris for a while. He would try to convince potential French settlers of the advantages of living in the wilderness of upstate New York, while Morris would take care of the American side of the business.Morris, who had already delayed his departure from Europe for more than a year, was eager to go home, but then young Alexander Le Ray became dangerously ill with smallpox, and the journey was again delayed. As soon as the boy had recovered by September 1798, they could search for a suitable ship that would take them and their considerable luggage, including Morris’s two horses, to New York.

At the time of departure on the ship Ocean, Grace had to be distracted in order not to upset her too much with the upcoming separation from her husband. Morris wrote: “The Ship gets under Way and we part with our friend Leray which is after all Preparation a painful Thing for his Wife. We deceive her therefore and he is off before she knows a Word of the Matter.” They finally left, rather late in the season, on October 4, 1798.

Arrival of a ship at Battery Park, New York c. 1800

Morris accompanied Grace and her two young children on a horrendous voyage across the Atlantic, but during the eleven-week ordeal he mentions their presence on the same ship only once, when he commented on having to take care of “Poupon” (baby) during a storm in which the water flowed into the nurse’s bed. Both his horses died at sea. A man fell overboard and drowned. They almost ran out of food. They almost shipwrecked near Rhode Island. They finished the last stretch of the journey on another ship. Finally, they reached New York on December 23, 1798, where Grace’s brother Richard welcomed her home.

GRACE COXE IN AMERICA, 1799-1810.

After arriving in the United States, Grace Coxe Le Ray, alone with the two youngest children but of course with the help of a nurse and footman and probably other servants, spent five months in New York City. By late spring 1799 she found herself in Sidney, New Jersey, where her parents lived, and in January 1800 she had settled in Burlington, NJ. There she socialized with French émigrés, the elite that had fled the violence in their country. One of them was the later King Louis -Philippe I of France.

King Louis-Philippe I de Bourbon, 1830.
He spent some years in exile in America, meeting
Morris again at the end of 1799/early 1800.

In August 1802, her husband finally came back from France, leaving their son behind in Paris. Vincent was twelve years old now and ready for higher education at the Ecole Polytechnique. James was in charge of the affairs of the French investors in land in upstate New York and Pennsylvania, a job that kept him on his toes. But unfortunately, fairly soon afterwards in 1804, he had to go to France again: his father had passed away and he was needed to take care of the inheritance. Again, he would stay away a long time, three years this time, until July 1807. During his absence, Morris was given power of attorney to deal with business affairs in America. He also was to give Grace a monthly allowance of 200 dollars. To put this in perspective: a laborer’s wage was 10-20 dollars a month. So, 200 does not sound bad at all, one would think.

During the periods Le Ray resided in France, the correspondence between the two men intensified; those letters mostly concern the business of their landholdings, but sometimes they touch on political or personal aspects. As mentioned before, we also have a few letters in our files from Morris to Grace in the period 1805-07; from reading through them, it becomes clear that Morris was getting more and more annoyed with her about her spending habits.

TROUBLE BREWING, 1804-1807.

Sans Souci Hotel in Ballston Spa c.1850.

As soon as Le Ray had left in July 1804, Grace took off to the hot springs in northern New York taking 6 to 7-year old Alexander with her. Whether this was merely vacationing or for health reasons is not clear. It is likely that 10-year old Thérèse was left behind at Madame Grelaud’s school in Philadelphia (but that remains to be confirmed through more research of archival material).

The first sign of trouble surfaced after Grace stopped by at Morrisania in October 1804 on her way home to Philadelphia (where she and James had recently moved to) from Ballston Spa, New York. It was then that she submitted some unexpected bills.

On November 15, 1804, an alarmed Morris wrote to Le Ray in Paris:

“I think her Expenditures besides travelling Charges will rather exceed $200 per Month. Her Board and that of Alexr. who was with her at Ballstown and may perhaps be with her at Phila[delphia]: $15 per Week--four Servants viz [= that is] Coachman, Footman, and two black Women $20—Two Horses $6—Add Cloaths, Washing, Wine, Tea, Fuel, Black Smith’s Bill, Footman’s Wages, &ca.”

These expenses added up to much more than the two hundred dollars she received per month. Her allowance was supposed to cover her cost of living, the servants, and the cost of education for the children. She, however, spent it on other things like a $300 coach repair, and the expensive trip to the spa up north. Apparently, she did not spend any of the money on the children’s schools, and instead of boarding them out Grace tried to keep the children with her. On top of that, she quarreled with headmistress Madame Grelaud.

Morris was very annoyed with her behavior, “If you prefer keeping the Children with you, it will be an Injury to them.” He demanded she put Thérèse as a boarder in school in Philadelphia, and Alexander in a seminary in Baltimore, according to their father’s wishes. He thought “Ladies in general” were not equipped to handle money, so he decided he would pay the education costs for the children directly to their schools, thereby cutting Grace's allowance to 150 dollars per month per January 1807.If she still would not obey, it would go down to 100.

Morris wrote to congratulate Mrs. Le Ray after Vincent had won a prize at his school in Paris,and wished for similar success for her other children. Thérèse could win a prize too, he wrote sarcastically on New Year’s Day 1807, since she “excells all the young Ladies in Philadelphia in the Art of lying abed all the Morning.”

This of course was all her mother’s bad influence.

Ballroom fashion anno 1807.

It looked like his threat had effect. Soon afterwards Thérèse was placed as a boarder at the renowned school of Mrs. Rivardi, therefore not allowed to go home during the nights, because “she goes late, comes away early, attends Balls, and wastes Time which can never be recalled.” In March 1807 Morris wrote his last letter to Grace, which he ends with: “some Years hence you will thank me.”

In bringing Le Ray up to date about his family affairs, Morris wrote, “I shall get the Children placed as they ought to be. I suppose the good Lady will call me a cross old Devil and feel much hurt.”He genuinely thought she was being unreasonable. However, things only got worse.......

THE MARRIAGE CRISIS.

It seemed that Morris's strict approach to Mrs. Le Ray earlier in the year had not worked; she was even contemplating a divorce from her husband now. The first letter from Gouverneur Morris to James Le Ray de Chaumont after his return to the States mid-1807 is dedicated solely to the worrisome home situation of the Le Rays: “all was wrong: very wrong.”

Morris's letter to James Le Ray, 16 August 1807.

In his letter, Morris analyzed the situation and advised
accordingly. He suggested Le Ray limit
the contact his wife was to have with the children. That it had been a mistake
to marry her in the first place, due to cultural differences in American and
French society. Sure, it had been the honorable thing to do to marry her, and Le
Ray had been good to her, indulgent, even.

But now, Morris insisted, time had come to put his foot
down because it concerned the education of his children.

“That on one only Subject you had found it a Duty to use the Authority
of a Husband—to protect your Children. That their Education, on which must
depend their future Respectability and Happiness, was too near your Heart to
permit any Consideration whatever to deter you from superintending it. Then
appeal to her Reason and Conscience. Desire her finally to consult with any
Person in whom she has Confidence, since unfortunately she no longer confides
in her best Friend [i.e. Le Ray himself]—Entreat her, above all Things, not to
think of a Divorce the Consequence of which must be both injurious and
disgraceful.”

Only to
continue with revealing the underlying purpose of his advice:

“If
I mistake not, this Course will lead her to insist more strongly on a Divorce.
Then, when all is ripe, you will take an Opportunity to say very coolly; well
Madam since you wish a Divorce, apply for it to the proper Authority—from this
Moment, if you continue to be my Wife, you shall obey your Husband; and if (as
I too clearly perceive) you are insensible to Reason, you shall be sensible to
Correction. The Law gives me a Right to administer moderate Correction to a
disobedient Wife, and at the first Moment you shall receive it from my Hand.”

Is he suggesting some domestic violence would help the situation here? Morris
concludes, clearly satisfied with himself:

“This would I think
change a vain foolish Woman into a decent well behaved Wife”.

The clever plan, however, did not work. Grace gave in, the
children were placed solidly in boarding schools and she and James stayed
married. The marital issue does not come up again in any of Morris's letters.

ALL WELL THAT ENDS
WELL?

The following year the Le Rays made use of their newly built house
in remote Leraysville (later Le Ray), in the relative wilderness of upstate New York. The
couple (there is no evidence of the presence of the childrenin Morris's papers) only spent time there during late summer
and fall in 1808 and 1809, winters were spent in Philadelphia. When Morris visited
the last week of August 1808, and again from mid-October till mid-January 1809,
he complained of the terrible cold, the snow, the impassible roads and the
empty stores. He does not comment on the new house, nor does he mention seeing
Grace there.

The question is, did she even go there?

View of Utica in 1807, by Anne Hyde de Neuville.
A stop on the way to Leraysville in remote upstate New York, where Le Ray had built a house.

In the summer of 1810, James, Grace and Thérèse left for
France; Alexander probably stayed in school in Baltimore and 20-year old Vincent
certainly stayed behind in the US in charge of his father’s landholdings. Morris
kept up a correspondence with Vincent as well: 45 letters went to him in
Leraysville right up to Morris’s death in 1816.

Grace
died in 1812 in (French occupied) Switzerland. As far as we know, she was never
mentioned again in Morris’s diary or letters. Rumor has it her health had
never been good, but we have not found evidence for that in Morris’s papers.

WHAT HAPPENED TO THE REST OF THE
FAMILY?

Vincent Le Ray de Chaumont (1790-1875)

Vincent married
Cornelia Jumel in 1821 and was widowed by 1823; after
the land business in New York failed in c.1836, he also went to France. He remarried there and died in
1875.

Thérèse
married Hippolyte, marquis de Gouvello de Kériaval in 1816, and they both joined James Le Ray on his return to the States in 1816. Their first born child is buried
on the property at Leraysville (now military territory of Fort Drum). The text on her grave reads: "CLOTILDE de GOUVELLO died Sept 20th 1818 aged 1 year and 3 months. She was endeared
to her Parents and relatives and beloved by all who witnessed her
fifteen months of suffering life. Strew flowers on her grave." The young
people went back to France and had at least one son there, in 1821.

Alexander was with his father and sister in
1816, when they visited Morris. It is not clear yet whether Alexander movedback to France
at some point. He was still alive in 1830.

James Le Ray
worked with Vincent on the upstate New York land enterprise for many years,
until 1832 when he made a short trip to France, and then again until 1836, when the
business went bankrupt. He died in France in 1840; he never remarried.

-The cited letters are in Morris’s Letterbooks in the
Gouverneur Morris Papers at the Library of Congress in Washington.

-For information on the
Le Ray family, see Thomas J. Schaeper,
France and America in the Revolutionary Era, the Life of Jacques-Donatien Leray de Chaumont, 1725-1803 (1995).

-For pictures and details on settling of upstate New York, see Franklin Benjamin Hough, A History of Jefferson County in the State of New York (1854).

In July 1803 Morris was on the way to Boston with his friend and business partner James Le Ray de Chaumont, when they stopped for the night at Hezekiah Sabin’s tavern in Pomfret, Massachusetts. While there, John Rutledge, Jr., Federalist Representative from South Carolina, who was traveling in the opposite direction, came in. He sat down with Morris’s party and they discussed the bad condition of the roads lying ahead. Soon afterwards, Rutledge wrote to fellow Federalist Harrison Gray Otis in Boston about this encounter.

He had arrived at the inn on that rainy night and "heard a chattering in French."Inside he "found Gouvre Morris with two french Valêts--a french travelling companion [Le Ray] and his hair buckled up in about one hundred Papilliottes. His wooden leg, papilliottes [curl papers], french attendants, and french conversation made his Host [...] with the whole family stare most prodigiously."

A day or so later, further along the road, in a village where Rutledge dined, the innkeeper had mistaken Morris for New York Governor George Clinton with his French son-in-law Genet, much to Rutledge's amusement. After he corrected him, the man was very embarrassed, "[…] made many apologies [&] was very eloquent in his eulogies upon Morris, & expressed very strongly his regrets that he had not stopped & given him an opportunity of conversing with the great Man who had made such great speeches in Congress [...]"

On their return to New York, a few weeks later, Le Ray and Morris stopped for a short social visit at Rutledge’s in Wethersfield, Connecticut. Although Morris did not mention any details, we know that Rutledge was involved in a bit of a delicate situation at that time, and had temporarily retreated to Connecticut to lie low after a scandal in which he had been involved.

What was the matter?

There had been an ongoing conflict between him and Rhode Island Senator Christopher Ellery, who was of the anti-Federalist faction, supportive of President Jefferson. The issue was about two presumably forged letters written to Jefferson in August 1801. Those letters purportedly were intended to provoke an incriminating response from Jefferson by calling on him to dismiss Federalists from various offices.

Ellery had accused Rutledge of being the author of the letters and in 1802 Jefferson gave them to Ellery to publish, in a context implying that Rutledge was indeed the conniving true author. The conflict escalated in a pub near Washington on December 28, when Rutledge physically attacked the Rhode Island senator. He hit him with a cane……

Needless to say, Rutledge, damaged by the publicity, did not run for Congress again.

Similar fight, in Congress in 1798, over the Sedition Act

*Some ofthis blog will appear in footnotes in our forthcoming edition of Diaries of Gouverneur Morris: New York 1799-1816 (publication c. 2018).

NEWS

For those lucky enough to live in Manhattan and its surrounds: Richard Brookhiser will be giving a presentation on Gouverneur Morris in December 2016, at the New-York Historical Society, in honor of the 200th anniversary of Morris's death, November 6, 1816.

There are no more knowledgeable and enjoyable speakers on American history, so be sure to check out the specifics about date and time on the N-YHS website

Gouverneur Morris (age 40)

All about the Gouv'

1. He was a significant contributor to the U.S. Constitution, drafting its final version and writing the Preamble "We the People".

2. He was (in our opinion but most agree) the most engaging Founding Father next to Benjamin Franklin, and one of the most talented: he was a great writer, a great speaker, he had a wonderful sense of humor, one that George Washington, his friend, appreciated.

3. He was U.S. minister (ambassador) to France from 1792-94, during the height of the French Revolution, replacing Jefferson. It was a most terrifying period, and his service to our country is unparalled in diplomatic history, and deserves recognition, respect -- and further study.

4. He was an early and significant promoter of the Erie Canal.

5. He was a member of the commission that designed the "grid" of the streets of Manhattan.

-Citations from letters come from Morris’s letterbooks in the Gouverneur Morris Papers at the Library of Congress in Washington.

-For pictures and details on settling of upstate New York, see e.g., Franklin Benjamin Hough, A History of Jefferson County in the State of New York (1854); Hough, A History of St. Lawrence and Franklin Counties (1853) and Hough, A History of Lewis County (1860).

-For information on the Le Ray family, see Thomas J. Schaeper, France and America in the Revolutionary Era, The Life of Jacques-Donatien Leray de Chaumont, 1725-1803 (1995).